Research pain

RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access

Knowledge, and use of labour pain relief
methods and associated factors among
obstetric caregivers at public health centers
of East Gojjam zone, Amhara region,
Ethiopia: a facility based cross- sectional
study
Keralem Anteneh Bishaw1*, Endalew Gemechu Sendo2 and Workinesh Sinshaw Abebe2

  • Abstract
  • Background
  • : The study was conducted in public health centers of East Gojjam Zone, Amhara region, Ethiopia. The
    purpose of this study was to assess knowledge, and use of labour pain relief methods and associated factors
    among obstetric caregivers in the study setting.

  • Methods
  • : A facility-based cross-sectional study design was conducted from March 1–30, 2018. The study was
    conducted among three hundred and nine sampled obstetric caregivers. Structured questionnaire was used to
    collect the data. The data were entered into Epi-data version 4.2 Software for cleaning and exported to SPSS
    version 23.0 for data analysis. Multivariate logistic regression was carried out for variables with a p-value < 0.25 in bivariate logistic regression to determine significant relationships between the dependent and independent variables. Statistical significance was determined at 95% confidence interval (CI) and p-value below 0.05.

    Result: The overall use of labour pain relief methods reported was 34.4%, (30.4% non-pharmacological and 8.4
    pharmacological, respectively). More than half of the study participants (54.2%) had adequate knowledge about
    labour pain relief methods. In multivariate analysis, being a midwifery profession [AOR =2.814, 95% CI = (1.574–
    5.031)], having positive attitude [AOR = 4.370, 95% CI = (2.523–7.567)], and professionals with a medium level of
    education [AOR = 3.450, 95% CI = (1.993–5.971)] were factors significantly associated with knowledge of obstetric
    caregivers about labour pain relief methods. In multivariate analysis, knowledge of obstetric caregivers [AOR = 3.821,
    95% CI = (2.091–6.980)], positive attitude of obstetric caregivers [AOR = 2.455, 95% CI = ((1.358–4.436))] and
    experience of obstetric caregivers [AOR = 2.56, 95% CI = (1.350–4.845) were factors significantly associated with the
    use of labour pain relief methods.

    (Continued on next page)

    © The Author(s). 2020 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License,
    which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give
    appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if
    changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons
    licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons
    licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain
    permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
    The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the
    data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

    * Correspondence: keralemante2010@gmail.Com
    1Department of Midwifery, Debre-Markos University, College of Medicine and
    Health Sciences, Debre-Markos, Ethiopia
    Full list of author information is available at the end of the article

    Bishaw et al. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth (2020) 20:180
    https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-020-2844-z

    http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1186/s12884-020-2844-z&domain=pdf

    http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

    http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/

    mailto:keralemante2010@gmail.Com

    (Continued from previous page)

  • Conclusion
  • : In this study, the overall use of labour pain relief methods by obstetric caregivers was low. Systemic
    opioid (Pethdine) was reportedly one of the most known pharmacological pain relief methods in this study.
    Providers’ knowledge, attitude and work experience had shown statistical significance with the use of labour pain
    relief methods. Task-oriented in- service training is required to fortify obstetric caregivers’ knowledge and attitude
    towards the use of labour pain relief methods.

    Keywords: Knowledge, Labour pain relief methods, Obstetric caregivers, Ethiopia

    Background

    Pain accompanies a human being since the beginning of
    his or her existence and is widely recognized as a nega-
    tive phenomenon. In fact, it is an indispensable element
    of our life. It signals the worsening of health (called
    pathologic pain in that case), or it supports the progress
    of natural processes taking place in the body, e.g. during
    labour (physiological pain) [1].
    Since creation, human beings have constantly felt pain

    and have always tried to control it in different ways.
    Labour pain is one of the most severe pains. This pain,
    as one of the inevitable aspects of the childbirth process,
    is unlike from other pains. It is not a sign of injury or
    (tissue damage), reduces spontaneously, is regular and
    continuous, gets tense gradually, and leads to a pleasant
    incident, which is childbirth [2].
    Pain during labour is a central part of women’s experi-

    ence of childbirth, as its excruciating nature makes most
    women want to alleviate it. Childbirth is among one of
    the most intense pain that majority of women will en-
    dure during their lifetime [3, 4]. Unresolved past psycho-
    logical or physical distress along with loneness, lack of
    knowledge, unfriendly or unresponsive treatment during
    labour might surge the chance that the woman will suf-
    fer. In sub-Saharan Africa particularly in Nigeria, giving
    birth may not be an excited incident, however, it can be
    an unhappiness experience owing to some midwives’ at-
    titude towards the laboring woman who scream at
    labouring woman mainly when she cries or complains of
    labour pain [5].
    Various pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic treat-

    ments have been developed to alleviate the labour pains;
    and their use has become popular, specifically in devel-
    oped countries [6]. Pain relief during labour is desired
    by many women, irrespective of race or belief, and con-
    tributes enormously to their satisfaction with the experi-
    ence of childbirth. Labour pain can be perceived to be
    the most severe form of pain experienced in a woman’s
    life. Studies have shown that when women are offered
    analgesia during labour, they report greater satisfaction
    with their overall birth experience [7, 8].
    A study in Southeast Nigeria among Igbo women re-

    ported 67.6% of labouring women need labor pain allevi-
    ation, however, only 27% of parturient received pain

    relief during labour [9]. Another study in Aga Khan
    teaching and referral hospital in Kenya found that 90%
    of woman would request some form of labour pain relief
    at their next delivery but 18% had been offered some
    form of pain relief at their last delivery with 82% of those
    offered having effective pain relief as reported by the
    study participants [10].
    Although labor pain management is accepted and im-

    plemented in many countries of the world, in Ethiopia
    pain management during labor is not a common prac-
    tice. This might be as a result of a number of factors:
    the availability of drugs, health care delivery systems,
    limited knowledge, providers’ attitude about labor pain
    management, and choice of caregivers and clients. Of
    these, the attitude, knowledge, and skills of the provider
    to offer labour analgesia are vital, particularly in low-
    income countries, including Ethiopia [11, 12]. Therefore,
    this study aimed at assessing the level of knowledge, use
    of labour pain relief methods and associated factors
    among obstetric caregivers at public health centers of
    East Gojjam Zone, Amhara Region, Ethiopia.

    Methods
    Study design
    A facility-based cross-sectional study was conducted.

    Study area and period
    The study was conducted in public health centers of East
    Gojjam Zone from March 1–30, 2018. East Gojjam is
    one of an administrative zone in Amhara regional state
    of Ethiopia. Debre Markos town is the capital city of
    East Gojjam zone, which is 265 Km far from Bahirdar,
    the capital city of Amhara region and 299 Km from
    Addis Ababa, the capital city of Ethiopia. According to
    2010 Health Bureau of East Gojjam Zone, there were
    100 public health centers, and 329 health officers, 797
    nurses and 307 midwives working in the zone (district).

    Sample size, population and sampling technique
    We selected thirty-three (33) public health centers (33%)
    out of 100 public health centers located in the study area
    by simple random sampling technique (lottery method).
    The source population of the study was health profes-
    sionals in public health centers of East Gojjam Zone,

    Bishaw et al. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth (2020) 20:180 Page 2 of 9

    Amhara region, Ethiopia. The study population was ob-
    stetric caregivers available during the study period in
    sampled health centers. Three hundred and nine (309)
    sampled obstetric caregivers; (including midwives,
    nurses, and health officers) who were giving obstetric
    care in the delivery room were consented and included
    in the study. Health care providers came to labour ward
    for consultation during study period were excluded from
    the study. Since there were small numbers of study
    population in the study area, all obstetric care caregivers,
    who were available during the study period were consid-
    ered as study participants.

    Data collection tools and procedures
    A Structured pretested self-administered questionnaire
    was used to collect the data. The questionnaire was
    adapted from reviewed literature [13–15], and with some
    amendments into the local context. The questionnaire
    consisted of seven parts: the first part was used to assess
    socio-demographic characteristics of obstetric caregivers
    while the rest were used to assess the knowledge, atti-
    tude, use, preference of labour pain relief methods and
    institutional factors affecting the use of labour pain relief
    method. The questionnaire was designed in English to
    be understood by every study participants. Nine diploma
    nurses were recruited for data collection and two BSc
    midwives were hired for the supervision of data collec-
    tion procedure.

    Measurement
    Knowledge about labour pain relief methods were mea-
    sured by a 10-item knowledge questionnaire adapted from
    previous studies [13–15]. The scale for assessing knowledge
    were from 0 to 10 scores. Correct answers were given a
    score of 1 and incorrect answers 0. Those who scored less
    than the mean value were considered to have inadequate
    knowledge while those who scored greater than or equal to
    the mean value were considered as having good knowledge.
    Use of labor pain relief method was measured by the

    following question: Obstetric care provider who an-
    swered “yes” for the question “Have you ever provide
    any labor pain relief method in the past one month? At-
    titude towards labor pain relief method: A seven (7) item
    response options (Yes/No) were adapted from prior
    studies [13, 14]. The total score were computed for each
    respondent and it ranges from 0 to 14 scores. Those
    who score less than the mean value were considered to
    have negative attitude while those who score greater
    than or equal to the mean value were considered as hav-
    ing positive attitude towards labour pain relief methods.

    Data quality control
    Training was provided for data collectors and supervi-
    sors on objective, the benefit of the study, individual’s

    right and informed consent for the common under-
    standing of the study in general and the questionnaire in
    particular. A pre – test was done in west Gojjam zone
    public health centers on 5% of obstetric caregivers two
    weeks before the actual data collection time. Regular
    supervision during data collection was made; the ques-
    tionnaire was reviewed and checked for completeness,
    accuracy and consistency by the research team and
    supervisors.

    Data analysis
    First, the questionnaire was checked for completeness.
    The data were entered into Epi-data version 4.2 Software
    for cleaning and exported to SPSS version 23.0 for data
    analysis. Descriptive statistics were computed to deter-
    mine frequencies and summary statistics (mean, stand-
    ard deviation, and percentage) to describe the study
    population in relation to socio-demographic and other
    related variables. Bivariate logistic regression was carried
    out to see the association of each of the independent
    variables with the outcome variable. Multivariate logistic
    regression was then carried out for variables with a p-
    value < 0.25 to determine significant relationships between the dependent and independent variables. Stat- istical significance was determined at 95% confidence interval (CI) and p-value below 0.05.

  • Results
  • Socio demographic characteristics of respondents
    Out of the 309 sampled obstetric caregivers, 299
    responded to the questionnaires making a response rate
    of 96.8%. The mean age of the respondents was 28.96 (±
    SD = 4.195) years. A significant number 194 (64.9%) of
    them were in the age group of 20–29 years. More than
    half 162 (54.2%) of the respondents were males and the
    majority (86.6%) were Orthodox Christians. Out of the
    total respondents, 31.1% were midwives by their profes-
    sion. Nearly half 149 (49.8%) of study participants were
    diploma holders and 49.2% of them had BSc degree.
    Among the respondents (61.9%) had work experience of
    less than 5 years (See Table 1).

    Knowledge of study participants about labour pain relief
    methods
    Majority (94.3%) of respondents reported that they knew
    about labour pain management methods in general, of
    these 44 (14.7%) knew pharmacologic and 58 (19.4%)
    knew non-pharmacologic labour pain relief methods
    only. Nevertheless, 175 (58.5%) of them reported that
    they knew both labour pain relief methods.
    Among the study participants who knew pharmaco-

    logic methods, 174 (79.5%) of them knew steroidal
    drugs, 130 (59.4%) systemic opioid’s, 75 (34.2%) epidural
    analgesia and 24 (11%) inhalational methods,

    Bishaw et al. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth (2020) 20:180 Page 3 of 9

    respectively. Of all who knew about pharmacologic
    labour pain management methods, 161 (73.5%) and 157
    (71.7%) of them reported delay progress of labour and
    fetal distress as a side effect of labour analgesia, respect-
    ively (See Fig. 1).
    One hundred fifty-five (51.8%) of respondents reported

    that they knew a WHO pain ladder. Among the study
    participants who knew non-pharmacologic labour pain
    relief methods, psychotherapy 217 (93.1%), allow the
    mother to ambulate 188 (80.7%), massage the back
    175(75.1%), show the woman how to bear down 127
    (54.5%) and allow companion of choice of labouring
    woman 110 (47.2%) were the commonly reported non-
    pharmacologic labour pain relief methods (See Table 2).
    In this study, out of the total respondents more than

    half (54.2%) of obstetric care providers had adequate
    knowledge on listed types of labour relief methods (with

    95% CI = 48.55–59.85%) while the rest 137 (45.8%) of re-
    spondents had inadequate knowledge about the listed
    labour pain relief methods.

    Attitude towards labour pain relief methods
    As regards the attitude of obstetric care givers towards
    labour pain relief methods, more than half (57.2%) of
    them had positive attitude whereas 42.8% of them had
    negative attitude towards managing of labour pain. The
    majority (86.3%) of the study participants believed man-
    aging of labour could help labouring woman to cope
    labour pain. However, 55.9% of them thought that
    pharmacologic labour pain relief method (analgesic) is
    not required for managing such labour pain.

    Use of labour pain relief methods
    The result of this study showed that the overall use of
    labour pain relief methods among obstetric caregivers
    was reported as 34.4% (30.4% non-pharmacologic and
    8.4% pharmacologic pain relief methods) with 95% confi-
    dence interval of [29.01–39.78], respectively. From the
    non-pharmacologic labour pain management methods,
    psychotherapy was the most widely used method, which
    was prescribed by 132 (44.2%) of obstetric caregivers
    followed by massaging the back 122(40.8%) (See
    Table 3).

    Personal preference and pain expectation
    From the total study participants, most obstetric care-
    givers (87.6%) expected labour pain as severe pain while
    (3.4%) of them expected labour pain as moderate pain.
    Among the study participants, more than half (55.9%)
    preferred non-pharmacologic methods while 10.7% of
    them preferred pharmacologic methods to manage
    labour pain, respectively. Diclofenac (51.2%) was the
    highest reported preferred pharmacologic method
    followed by pethdine (34.1%).

    Reasons for non-utilization of labour pain relief methods
    The most common reasons reported for non-utilization
    of labour pain relief methods were high patient flow 131
    (43.8%) followed by unavailability of drugs 124(41.5%),
    respectively (See Fig. 2).
    Of those who knew pharmacologic methods, 153

    (51.2%), 140 (46.8%), 102 (34.1%) and 93 (31.1%) of
    study participants reported diclofenac, Paracetamol,
    Pethidine and Hyoscine were available in their health
    centers for use, respectively. Eighty-seven (29.1%) of
    study participants reported companion as a choice for
    labouring woman is not allowed by their health center
    and 87% of them reported that they didn’t get any spe-
    cial training on labour pain management.

    Table 1 Socio-demographic characteristic of obstetric
    caregivers working at labour ward in public health centers of
    east Gojjam zone, Amhara region, Ethiopia, 2018 G.C. (N = 299)

    Characteristics Frequency (n) Percent (%)

    Age (in years)

    20–29 194 64.9

    30–39 97 32.4

    ≥ 40 8 2.7

    Mean age: 28.96
    (± SD = 4.195)

    Gender

    Male 162 54.2

    Female 137 45.8

    Religion

    Orthodox 258 86.3

    Muslim 30 10

    Protestant 10 3.4

    Other© 1 0.3

    Profession

    Health officer 75 25.1

    Midwife 93 31.1

    Nurse 131 43.8

    Level of education

    Diploma 149 49.8

    BSc degree 147 49.2

    Masters 3 1

    Clinical experience (in years)

    ≤ 5 185 61.9

    6–9 76 25.4

    ≥ 10 38 12.7

    Other© = Catholic

    Bishaw et al. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth (2020) 20:180 Page 4 of 9

    Factors associated with knowledge of obstetric caregivers
    towards labour pain relief methods
    Profession categories, staff attitude, level of education,
    and companionship were significantly associated with

    knowledge of obstetric caregivers about labour pain re-
    lief methods in bivariate logistic regression. These vari-
    ables also remained significantly associated in
    multivariable logistic regression. Being midwifery profes-
    sionals were 2.8 times more likely to be knowledgeable
    about labour pain relief methods than health officer and
    nurses. [AOR =2.814, 95% CI = (1.574–5.031)]. Profes-
    sionals with a medium level of education were 3.45
    times more likely to be knowledgeable about labour pain
    relief methods compared to those with a lower level of
    education [AOR = 3.450, 95% CI = (1.993–5.971)]. Ob-
    stetric caregivers who had a positive attitude about

    Table 2 Knowledge of obstetric caregivers on Non –
    pharmacologic labour pain relief methods working at labour
    ward in public health centers of east Gojjam zone, Amhara
    region, Ethiopia, 2018 G.C. (n = 233)

    Types Frequency (n) Percent (%)

    Psychotherapy Yes 217 93.1

    No 16 6.9

    Allow the mother to ambulate Yes 188 80.7

    No 45 19.3

    Massage the back Yes 175 75.1

    No 58 24.9

    Allow free vertical positioning Yes 61 26.2

    No 162 73.8

    Transcutaneous electrical
    nerve stimulation

    Yes 13 5.6

    No 220 94.4

    Show the woman how to bear down Yes 127 54.5

    No 106 45.5

    Acupuncture Yes 20 8.6

    No 213 91.4

    Hypnosis Yes 13 5.6

    No 220 94.4

    Allow companion of labouring
    woman choice

    Yes 110 47.2

    No 123 53.8

    Music therapy Yes 42 18

    No 181 82

    Table 3 Non -pharmacologic methods use by obstetric
    caregivers working at labour ward in public health centers of
    east Gojjam zone, Amhara region, Ethiopia, 2018 G.C. (n = 299)

    Types Frequency (n) Percent (%)

    Psychotherapy Yes 132 44.1

    No 167 55.9

    Allow the mother to ambulate Yes 116 38.8

    No 183 61.2

    Massage the back Yes 122 40.8

    No 177 59.2

    Allow free vertical positioning Yes 25 8.4

    No 274 91.6

    Show the woman how to bear down Yes 96 32.1

    No 203 67.9

    Hot compress Yes 7 2.3

    No 292 97.7

    Allow companion of her choice Yes 87 29.1

    No 212 70.9

    Fig. 1 Knowledge of obstetric caregivers on side effect of pharmacologic labour pain relief methods working at labour ward in public health
    centers of east Gojjam zone, Amhara region, Ethiopia, 2018 (n = 219)

    Bishaw et al. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth (2020) 20:180 Page 5 of 9

    labour pain management were 4.37 times more likely to
    be knowledgeable about labour pain management
    methods than those who had a negative attitude for
    labour pain management [AOR = 4.370, 95% CI =
    (2.523–7.567)] (See Table 4).

    Factors associated with use of labour pain relief methods
    Bivariate logistic regression revealed that professional
    categories, knowledge, attitude, experience of obstetric
    caregivers and allowing a companion for a labouring
    woman were associated with the use of labour pain relief
    methods. But only knowledge, attitude and experience of
    obstetric caregivers remained significantly associated
    with the use of labour pain relief methods for labouring

    woman in multivariable logistic regression. Obstetric
    caregivers who had adequate knowledge about labour
    pain relief methods for managing labour pain were about
    3.82 times more likely to use labour pain relief methods
    than to those obstetric caregivers who had inadequate
    knowledge about labour pain relief methods [AOR =
    3.821, 95% CI = (2.091–6.980)].
    Obstetric caregivers who had a positive attitude for

    managing labour pain were 2.45 times more likely to use
    labour pain management methods than those who had a
    negative attitude for labour pain management [AOR =
    2.455, 95% CI = ((1.358–4.436))]. Obstetric caregivers
    who had an experience of 6–9 years and ≥ 10 years were
    2.56 and 2.50 more likely to use labour pain relief

    Fig. 2 Bar chart showing reasons for non-utilization of labour pain relief methods, 2018. (n = 299). Key: Other reasons: Free of side effect and
    labour pain is a natural process which should not be managed

    Table 4 Bivariate and Multivariate analysis of factors associated with knowledge of obstetric caregivers towards labour pain relief
    methods east Gojjam zone, Amhara regional state, in Ethiopia, 2018. G.C. (n = 299)

    Knowledge of obstetric caregivers COR (95% CI) AOR (95% CI) P Value

    Characteristics Adequate inadequate

    Frequency (n) Frequency (n)

    Profession

    Midwife 66(71%) 27(29%) 2.801(1.68–4.73) 2.814(1.574–5.031) .000

    Others 96(46.6%) 110(53.4%) 1.00 1.00

    Level of education

    Lower 68 (43.6%) 88(56.4%) 1.00 1.00

    Medium 94(65.7%) 49(34.3%) 2.483(1.55–3.97) 3.450(1.993–5.971) .000

    Companion

    Yes 132 (62.3%) 80(37.7%) 3.135(1.86–5.28) 2.349(1.314–4.197) .004

    No 30(34.5%) 57 (65.5%) 1.00 1.00

    Attitude

    Favorable attitude 118(69%) 53(31%) 4.250(2.61–6.92) 4.370(2.523–7.567) 0.000

    Un Favorable attitude 44(34.4%) 84(65.6%) 1.00 1.00

    Lower level: Diploma; Mid-level: BSc holders; Others: Health officers & Nurses

    Bishaw et al. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth (2020) 20:180 Page 6 of 9

    methods than those who have ≤5 years’ experience
    [AOR = 2.56,95% CI = (1.350–4.845) and [AOR = 2.50,
    95% CI = (1.132–5.524)], respectively (See Table 5).

  • Discussion
  • The current study aimed to assess knowledge and use of
    labour pain relief methods and associated factors among
    obstetric caregivers at public health centers of East Goj-
    jam Zone, Amhara region, Ethiopia.

    Knowledge of obstetric caregivers towards labour pain
    relief methods
    In this study, systemic opioid (Pethdine) was reportedly
    one of the most identified pharmacological pain relief
    methods, which is similar with studies from Zaria,
    Greek, and Ibadan (Nigeria), respectively [6, 16, 17]. This
    might be due to accessibility and low cost of the drug on
    the market. The present study showed that 45.8% of ob-
    stetric caregivers had inadequate knowledge about
    labour pain relief methods. Our finding is lower than the
    findings reported from Tigray, Ethiopia (60.1%)
    and Ibadan, Nigeria (66.7%), respectively [13, 17]. This
    difference might be explained in terms of difference in
    study setting and socio- demographic characteristics of
    study participants. The study also found that midwifery
    professionals had adequate knowledge than health offi-
    cer and nurses, which was similar with Australian stud-
    ies undertaken by Lee et al (2012) [18], which reported

    knowledge as a significant factor for obstetric analgesia
    use. In our study, professionals with a medium level of
    education were 3.4 times more likely to be
    knowledgeable than those with a lower level of educa-
    tion regarding labour pain relief methods. This might be
    explained in terms of variation in curriculum content of
    obstetric courses delivered to health professions based
    on their level of training programs. Positive attitude of
    staff also showed significant association with knowledge
    with regard to labour pain relief methods.

    Use of labour pain relief methods among obstetric
    caregivers
    The current study showed that the overall use of labour
    pain relief methods among obstetric caregivers was re-
    ported to be 34.4% (30.4% non-pharmacological and
    8.4% pharmacological) methods, respectively. This find-
    ing is inconsistent with earlier studies’ findings from dif-
    ferent parts of Ethiopia: Tigray, 43.3% [13], Addis
    Ababa, 47.5% [19] and Amhara, 40.1% [14]. The reasons
    might be the preceding studies were conducted in public
    hospitals where better knowledge of labour pain relief
    methods and drug availability are potentially high.
    In our study, the use of non-pharmacological methods

    was consistent with studies done in Dhaka, Bangladesh
    and Ghana where allowing laboring woman to move
    freely, showing the patient how to bear down, allowing
    companion, and massaging the back were the most

    Table 5 Bivariate and Multivariate analysis of factors associated with use of labour pain relief methods among obstetric caregivers
    east Gojjam zone, Amhara regional state, in Ethiopia, 2018G.C.(n = 299)

    Use of labour pain relief methods COR (95% CI) AOR (95% CI) P Value

    Variables Yes No

    Frequency (n) Frequency (n)

    Profession

    Midwife 40(44%) 53(56%) 1.713(1.032–2.842) 1.435(.801–2.572) .225

    Others 63(70.4%) 143(29.6%) 1.00 1.00

    Experience

    ≤ 5 years 52(28.1%) 133(71.9%) 1.00 1.00

    6–9 years 32(42.1%) 44(57.9%) 1.860(1.066–3.246) 2.56(1.350–4.845) .004*

    ≥ 10 year 19(50%) 19(50%) 2.558(1.255–5.213) 2.50(1.132–5.524) .023*

    Knowledge

    Inadequate 22(16.1%) 115(83.9%) 1.00 1.00

    Adequate 81(50%) 81(50%) 5.227(3.015–9.063) 3.82(2.091–6.980) .000*

    Attitude

    Favorable attitude 79(46.2%) 92 (53.8%) 3.721(2.177–6.360) 2.46(1.358–4.436) .000*

    Un Favorable attitude 24(18.8%) 104(81.2%) 1.00 1.00

    Companion

    Yes 84(39.6%) 128(60.3%) 2.349(1.317–4.188) 1.458(.761–2.793) .256

    No 19(21.8%) 68(78.2%) 1.00 1.00

    Lower level: Diploma; Mid-level: BSc holders; Others: Health officers & Nurses

    Bishaw et al. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth (2020) 20:180 Page 7 of 9

    applied non-pharmacologic pain relief methods [20, 21].
    This study found that the use of pharmacologic labour
    pain relief method by obstetric caregivers was reported
    to be 8.4% of which pethidine, diclofenac, paracetamol
    and Hyoscine were mostly used. This result is consistent
    with studies done in Bangladesh and Ghana, where these
    drugs were also used as pharmacological labour pain re-
    lief methods [20, 21].
    On the other hand, this result is higher than the find-

    ings from studies done in Amhara region referral hos-
    pital [14] and Tigray region general hospital [13]. This
    might be due to time difference related to previous stud-
    ies and increased awareness of obstetric caregivers
    towards labour pain management through time. None-
    theless, this result is found to be lower than the findings
    from Nigeria, 49% [3], Kenya, 18% [8] and Addis Ababa
    Ethiopia, 54.2% [19], respectively.
    This study revealed that obstetric caregivers who had a

    positive attitude for managing labor pain were 2.45 times
    more likely to use labor pain management methods than
    those who had a negative attitude for labour pain man-
    agement [AOR = 2.455, 95% CI = ((1.358–4.436))]. This
    finding is consistent with a study done in Bangladesh
    [20], and Ethiopia [15], respectively.
    In this study, obstetric caregivers who had adequate

    knowledge about labour pain relief methods for man-
    aging labour pain were 3.82 times more likely to use
    labour pain relief methods than those who had inad-
    equate knowledge about labour pain relief methods
    [AOR = 3.821, 95% CI = (2.091–6.980)], which is incon-
    sistent with studies from Nigeria and Abha Maternity
    Hospital in Saudi Arabia where health care providers
    who had adequate knowledge were more likely to pro-
    vide labour relief method for labouring woman [17, 22].
    The current study reported that obstetric caregivers

    who had an experience of 6–9 and ≥ 10 years were more
    likely to use labour pain relief methods than those who
    had ≤5 years’ experience [AOR = 2.56,95% CI = (1.350–
    4.845) and [AOR = 2.50,95% CI = (1.132–5.524), respect-
    ively. This finding is similar to a study done in the U.S
    where more experienced nurses provide more labour
    support [23]. In this study, high patient flow, small num-
    ber of staff, lack of knowledge, limited skill and unavail-
    ability of equipment and drugs for managing labour pain
    were factors affecting the use of labour pain relief
    methods. This finding is also consistent with a study
    done in Tigray region general hospitals, Ethiopia [13],
    Amhara region referral hospitals, [14], Addis Ababa,
    Ethiopia [19], Zaria, Nigeria [6] and Saudi Arabia [22].

    Limitation of the study
    The results of this study must be interpreted in the light
    of the following limitations. The study was conducted in
    public health centers of Amhara Region, Ethiopia. The

    perspectives of health providers in private health facil-
    ities were not explored in the study. The findings of this
    study are thus mainly applied to obstetric care providers
    in the study setting. Since the study was cross sectional
    study, it did not address the cause and effect relationship
    of the factors and the outcome variables.

    Conclusion
    Although labor pain management is accepted and imple-
    mented in many countries of the world, pain manage-
    ment during labor is not often practiced. This study is
    essential as it aims to assess knowledge, and use of
    labour pain relief methods and associated factors among
    obstetric caregivers in this study area of Ethiopia.
    The current study revealed that the overall use of labour

    pain by obstetric caregivers was low. Systemic opioid
    (Pethdine) was reportedly one of the most known
    pharmacological pain relief methods in this study. Pro-
    viders’ knowledge, attitude and work experience had
    shown statistical significance with the use of labour pain
    relief methods. Task-oriented in- service training is thus
    required to fortify obstetric caregivers’ knowledge and atti-
    tude towards the use of labour pain relief methods. Regu-
    lar supervision of obstetric caregivers and logistic supplies
    and analgesic drugs are also needed for effective labour
    pain management. Furthermore, researchers in the field
    are recommended to examine the use of labour pain relief
    methods from maternal’ request point of view.
    Overall, this is a fascinating study which has the poten-

    tial to provide cross cultural education of caregivers from
    a high income countries who might be caring for immi-
    grant women from low income countries, and may also be
    a very useful reference for planners of obstetric and mid-
    wifery care and education in low income countries.

  • Abbreviations
  • AOR: Adjusted Odds Ratio; CI: Confidence Interval; COR: Crude Odd Ratio;
    HCP: Health Care Providers; OCGs: Obstetric Caregivers; SPSS: Statistical
    Package for Social Sciences

  • Acknowledgements
  • We are indebted to Addis Ababa University, College of Health Sciences,
    School of Nursing and Midwifery for its financial and technical support. We
    are also very grateful to express our gratitude to East Gojjam Health Bureau
    and the District health office for their kind assistance during the entire
    process of the study. The authors are also grateful to the respondents who
    participated in this study. Special thanks go to the research assistants who
    participated in data collection.

  • Authors’ contributions
  • Bishaw, KA conceptualized the proposal, searched literature, trained field
    researchers for data collection and wrote the results and discussion sections.
    He also drafts the first manuscript. Sendo, EG & Abebe, WS contributed to
    the design of the study and provided advice as regards methods, data
    interpretation and analysis. Sendo, EG also critically reviewed and edited the
    manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

  • Funding
  • Funding for this study was made possible through students’ grants offered
    by Addis Ababa University post graduate office. Small grant is given for

    Bishaw et al. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth (2020) 20:180 Page 8 of 9

    postgraduate students to cover their expenses for data collectors and
    stationary. No other grants received for the study.

  • Availability of data and materials
  • All the data included in the manuscript can be accessed from the
    corresponding author with an email address keralemante2010@gmail.com

  • Ethics approval and consent to participate
  • Ethical approval was obtained from Addis-Ababa University and permission
    letter was secured from East Gojjam zone Health Bureau. Written informed
    consent was obtained from respondents after giving them information about
    the study. Finally, the confidentiality, anonymity of all the responses was kept
    and used only for research purposes.

  • Consent for publication
  • Not applicable

  • Competing interests
  • The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

  • Author details
  • 1Department of Midwifery, Debre-Markos University, College of Medicine and
    Health Sciences, Debre-Markos, Ethiopia. 2School of Nursing and Midwifery,
    Addis-Ababa University, College of Health Science, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

    Received: 17 December 2018 Accepted: 26 February 2020

  • References
  • 1. Dominick CH, Blyth FM, Nicholas MK. Unpacking the burden: understanding

    the relationships between chronic pain and co morbidity in the general
    population. Pain. 2012;153(2):293–304.

    2. Dolatian M, Hasanpour A, Heshmat R, Alavimajd H. The effect of reflexology
    on labor pain intensity. J Zanjan Univ Med Sci Health Serv. 2010;18:52–61.

    3. Lawani LO, Eze JN, Anozie OB, Iyoke CA, Ekem NN. Obstetric analgesia for
    vaginal birth in contemporary obstetrics: A survey of the practice of
    obstetricians in Nigeria. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2014;14:1.

    4. El-Wahab N, Robinson N. Analgesia and anaesthesia in labour. Obstet,
    Gynaecol Reprod Med. 2011;21(5):137–41.

    5. Danziger J. Childbirth myths around the world. Midwives Magazine. 2012;4:
    42.

    6. Ogboli-Nwasor E, Adaji S, Bature S, Shittu O. Pain relief in labor: a survey of
    awareness, attitude, and practice of health care providers in Zaria, Nigeria. J
    Pain Res. 2011;4:227–32.

    7. Hodnett ED. Pain and women’s satisfaction with the experience of
    childbirth: A systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;186:S160–72.

    8. Mung’ayi V, Nekyon D, Karuga R. Knowledge, attitude and use of labour
    pain relief methods among women attending antenatal clinic in Nairobi.
    East Afr Med J. 2008;85:438–41.

    9. Obuna JA, Umeora OUJ. Perception of labor pain and utilization of obstetric
    analgesia by Igbo women of Southeast Nigeria. J Obstet Anaesth Crit Care.
    2014;4(1):18.

    10. Karuga R, Nekyon D, Mung’ayi V. Knowledge, attitude and use of labour
    pain relief methods among women attending antenatal clinic in Nairobi.
    East Afr Med J. 2008;85(9):438–41.

    11. Kuti O, Faponle AF. Perception of labor pain among the Yoruba ethnic
    group in Nigeria. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2006;26:332–3.

    12. Waldenstrom U. Experience of labor and birth in 1111 women. J Psychosom
    Res. 1999;47:471–82.

    13. Sahile E, Yemaneh Y, Alehegn A, Niguse W, Salahuddin M, et al. Practice of
    labour pain management methods and associated factors among skilled
    attendants working at general hospitals in Tigray region, North Ethiopia:
    hospital-based cross-sectional study design. Health Sci J. 2017;11(4):516.

    14. Bitew A, Workie A, Seyum T, Demeke T. Utilization of obstetric analgesia in
    labor pain management and associated factors among obstetric care givers
    in Amhara regional state referral hospitals. A Hospital based Cross Sectional
    Study. Journal of Biomedical Sciences: Northwest Ethiopia; 2016.

    15. McCauley M, Stewart C, Kebede B. A survey of healthcare providers’
    knowledge and attitudes regarding pain relief in labor for women in
    Ethiopia. BMc pregnancy childbirth. 2017;17(1):56.

    16. Iliadou M. Labour pain and pharmacological pain relief practice points.
    Health sci J. 2009;3(Issue 4).

    17. EZE Ojerinde O, Onibokun A, Matthew Akpa O. Knowledge and practice of
    pain management among nurses in labour wards in Ibadan, Nigeria. Afr J
    Midwifery Womens Health. 2016;10(3):132–7.

    18. Lee N, Martensson LB, Kildea S. A cross sectional study of Australian
    midwives knowledge and use of sterile water injections for pain relief in
    labour. Women Birth. 2012;25(4):e74–e79.

    19. Mulugeta H. The practice of labor analgesia and its perceived barriers
    among health care providers working in public hospitals of Addis Ababa,
    Ethiopia; 2016.

    20. Aziato L, Kyei AA, Deku G. Experiences of midwives on pharmacological and
    non-pharmacological labour pain management in Ghana. Reprod Health.
    2017;14(1):128.

    21. Tasnim S. Perception about pain relief during normal labour among health
    care providers conducting delivery. Medicine Today. 2010;22(1):20–3.

    22. Mona Almushait1* RAG. Perception toward Non-Pharmacological Strategies
    in Relieving Labor Pain: An Analytical Descriptive Study. J Nat Scie Res. 2014;
    4(2):(ISSN 2225–0921 (Online)).

    23. Aschenbrenner AP, Hanson L, Johnson TS, Kelber ST. Nurses’ own birth
    experiences influence labor support attitudes and behaviors. J Obstet
    Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2016;45(4):491–501.

  • Publisher’s Note
  • Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in
    published maps and institutional affiliations.

    Bishaw et al. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth (2020) 20:180 Page 9 of 9

    mailto:keralemante2010@gmail.com

      Abstract

      Background

      Methods

      Result

      Conclusion

      Background

      Methods

      Study design

      Study area and period

      Sample size, population and sampling technique

      Data collection tools and procedures

      Measurement

      Data quality control

      Data analysis

      Results

      Socio demographic characteristics of respondents

      Knowledge of study participants about labour pain relief methods

      Attitude towards labour pain relief methods

      Use of labour pain relief methods

      Personal preference and pain expectation

      Reasons for non-utilization of labour pain relief methods

      Factors associated with knowledge of obstetric caregivers towards labour pain relief methods

      Factors associated with use of labour pain relief methods

      Discussion

      Knowledge of obstetric caregivers towards labour pain relief methods

      Use of labour pain relief methods among obstetric caregivers

      Limitation of the study

      Conclusion

      Abbreviations

      Acknowledgements

      Authors’ contributions

      Funding

      Availability of data and materials

      Ethics approval and consent to participate

      Consent for publication

      Competing interests

      Author details

      References

      Publisher’s Note

    Summarize the article you read in your own words. Assess the article in the manner described in the video.

    To do this, dissect the article into parts described in the video:

    · Title

    · Abstract

    · Introduction

    · Method

    · Results

    · Discussion

    · References.

    Pick one or two questions from each part of the article that are asked in the video. Then write a paper that includes both the summary and the assessment.

    Remember, you don’t have to entirely understand all the facts in the article to assess it.

    Required Reading

    Readings from Online: 

    · Choose an article to read from 

    Pub Med

    . Pick one that has to do with labor and pain.

    · Watch lecture on writing a research critique.

    Calculate the price of your order

    Select your paper details and see how much our professional writing services will cost.

    We`ll send you the first draft for approval by at
    Price: $36
    • Freebies
    • Format
    • Formatting (MLA, APA, Chicago, custom, etc.)
    • Title page & bibliography
    • 24/7 customer support
    • Amendments to your paper when they are needed
    • Chat with your writer
    • 275 word/double-spaced page
    • 12 point Arial/Times New Roman
    • Double, single, and custom spacing
    • We care about originality

      Our custom human-written papers from top essay writers are always free from plagiarism.

    • We protect your privacy

      Your data and payment info stay secured every time you get our help from an essay writer.

    • You control your money

      Your money is safe with us. If your plans change, you can get it sent back to your card.

    How it works

    1. 1
      You give us the details
      Complete a brief order form to tell us what kind of paper you need.
    2. 2
      We find you a top writer
      One of the best experts in your discipline starts working on your essay.
    3. 3
      You get the paper done
      Enjoy writing that meets your demands and high academic standards!

    Samples from our advanced writers

    Check out some essay pieces from our best essay writers before your place an order. They will help you better understand what our service can do for you.

    • Analysis (any type)
      Advantages and Disadvantages of Lowering the Voting Age to Thirteen
      Undergrad. (yrs 1-2)
      Political science
      APA
    • Coursework
      Leadership
      Undergrad. (yrs 1-2)
      Business Studies
      APA
    • Essay (any type)
      Is Pardoning Criminals Acceptable?
      Undergrad. (yrs 1-2)
      Criminal Justice
      MLA

    Get your own paper from top experts

    Order now

    Perks of our essay writing service

    We offer more than just hand-crafted papers customized for you. Here are more of our greatest perks.

    • Swift delivery
      Our writing service can deliver your short and urgent papers in just 4 hours!
    • Professional touch
      We find you a pro writer who knows all the ins and outs of your subject.
    • Easy order placing/tracking
      Create a new order and check on its progress at any time in your dashboard.
    • Help with any kind of paper
      Need a PhD thesis, research project, or a two-page essay? For you, we can do it all.
    • Experts in 80+ subjects
      Our pro writers can help you with anything, from nursing to business studies.
    • Calculations and code
      We also do math, write code, and solve problems in 30+ STEM disciplines.

    Frequently asked questions

    Get instant answers to the questions that students ask most often.

    See full FAQ
    • Is there a possibility of plagiarism in my completed order?

      We complete each paper from scratch, and in order to make you feel safe regarding its authenticity, we check our content for plagiarism before its delivery. To do that, we use our in-house software, which can find not only copy-pasted fragments, but even paraphrased pieces of text. Unlike popular plagiarism-detection systems, which are used by most universities (e.g. Turnitin.com), we do not report to any public databases—therefore, such checking is safe.

      We provide a plagiarism-free guarantee that ensures your paper is always checked for its uniqueness. Please note that it is possible for a writing company to guarantee an absence of plagiarism against open Internet sources and a number of certain databases, but there is no technology (except for turnitin.com itself) that could guarantee no plagiarism against all sources that are indexed by turnitin. If you want to be 100% sure of your paper’s originality, we suggest you check it using the WriteCheck service from turnitin.com and send us the report.

    • I received some comments from my teacher. Can you help me with them?

      Yes. You can have a free revision during 7 days after you’ve approved the paper. To apply for a free revision, please press the revision request button on your personal order page. You can also apply for another writer to make a revision of your paper, but in such a case, we can ask you for an additional 12 hours, as we might need some time to find another writer to work on your order.

      After the 7-day period, free revisions become unavailable, and we will be able to propose only the paid option of a minor or major revision of your paper. These options are mentioned on your personal order page.

    • How will I receive a completed paper?

      You will get the first version of your paper in a non-editable PDF format within the deadline. You are welcome to check it and inform us if any changes are needed. If everything is okay, and no amendments are necessary, you can approve the order and download the .doc file. If there are any issues you want to change, you can apply for a free revision and the writer will amend the paper according to your instructions. If there happen to be any problems with downloading your paper, please contact our support team.
    • Where do I upload files?

      When you submit your first order, you get a personal account where you can track all your orders, their statuses, your payments, and discounts. Among other options, you will have a possibility to communicate with your writer via a special messenger. You will be able to upload all information and additional materials on your paper using the “Files” tab on your personal page. Please consider uploading everything you find necessary for our writer to perform at the highest standard.
    See full FAQ

    Take your studies to the next level with our experienced specialists

    Live Chat+1 (857) 777-1210 EmailWhatsApp